Materials Corrosion in High Temperature Supercritical Carbon Dioxide

Jacob Mahaffey Arjun Kalra

Dr. Mark Anderson Dr. Kumar Sridharan

Outline

• Motivation/Background • Construction of Testing Facility • Procedure • Gas Purity • Sample Compositions • Weight Gain Analysis • SEM Images • Ongoing/Future Work • Conclusions

2

Background

• Long-term can corrosion can lead to: – Reduction in effective wall thickness – Reduction of thermal conductivity – Corrosion debris

• Previous work includes: – Research vs Industrial grade CO2 corrosion testing – Temperature and time dependence of corrosion – Different alloy testing (Iron and Nickel based

alloys, high temperature ceramic) – Surface treatments (Shot peening, Al/Y coatings)

3

Testing Facility

4

• Temperature control allows system to operate within ±1.5ºC

• Testing temperatures range from (up to 850ºC)

• Pressure can be held at 3600±2.5psi (temperature dependent)

• System operates at an average flow rate of .11kg/hr, which causes a CO2 refresh rate every two hours

Sample Holder with Samples

5

– Made out of Haynes 625 alloy – Alumina rod suspends samples in continuous stream of CO2 – Alumina spacers separate samples from each other – Fits roughly 70 samples total when full

Testing Procedure

• Samples polished to 800 grit, then cleaned with ethanol and DI water

• Autoclave cleaned and dried • Samples are tested for 200 hour intervals out

to 1000 hours • Weight measurements are accurate to ± 2µg

and dimensions have an accuracy of ± 2µm • Finished samples are analyzed using SEM,

EDS, XRD, ect

6

Research and Industrial Grade CO2 Gas Certificates

7

Industrial Grade CO2

Component Purity Limits

CO2 99.5%

Oxygen

Tested Material Compositions

8

Fe Cr Ni Al Mn Nb Cu Mo Si C W

347 Bal. 17.9 9.53 - 1.7 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.06 -

AFA-OC6* Bal. 13.8 25 3.6 2 2.5 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.11 0.2

IN800H Bal. 19.6 33.2 0.5 0.8 - 0.2 - 0.3 0.06 -

*AFA-OC6: Alumina-Forming Austenitic alloy developed at Oakridge National Lab

Other materials tested include: 230, 625, T92, Fe12Cr, T122, 310, 316, 617, 718, 282, 740, SiC, Ni-22Cr, AFA-OC7, AFA-OC10, PM2000

ASME Pressure Vessel Code Allowable Stress for Some Tested Alloys

9

* Chart values based on annealed form of alloys

Bare Sample vs Tested Samples After 200 Hours

10

IN800H 347SS IN800H

After 200 hours of testing Before testing

Inconel 800H

11

T-Value T-Crit (95%) Conclusion

800H IG 6.211 4.303 TRUE

800H RG

347 Stainless Steel

12

T-Value T-Crit (95%) Conclusion

347 IG 2.985 4.303 FALSE

347 RG

Alumina-Forming Austenitic (AFA-OC6)

13

T-Value T-Crit (95%) Conclusion

AFA-OC6 IG 10.821 4.303 TRUE

AFA-OC6 RG

14

O-K edge

Al-K edge

Fe-L edge

Cr-L edge

Mn-L edge

Ni-L edge

1 2 3 4 5

Position Al Fe Cr Mn Ni

1 12.0 51.9 14.9 1.2 20.0

2 78.2 13.6 4.0 0.0 4.1

3 98.6 0.4 1.0 0.0 0.0

4 8.1 3.5 68.2 20.2 0.0

5 24.8 33.1 23.6 18.5 0.0

Al + Fe + Cr + Mn + Ni = 100 at.%

AFA-OC6 @ 550oC, 200 hrs, pure CO2

1. AFA matrix 2. Al2O3 + (Fe, Cr, Ni) containing oxides 3. Al2O3 4. Al, Fe –containing (Cr, Mn)3O4 5. (Fe, Al, Cr, Mn)-containing oxides

STEM Cross Section of AFA-OC6

Pt AFA

Weight Gain Data for 200 hours at 650C

15

347 800H AFA-OC6

Test T-Value T-Crit Conclusion T-

Value T-Crit Conclusion T-

Value T-Crit Conclusion

IG-RG 9.32 2.15 TRUE 3.37 2.15 TRUE 7.99 2.15 TRUE *n>5 for all tests

a) Weight change data shows statistically significant difference between RG and IG CO2 for 347ss, Inconel 800H, and AFA-OC6

b) Weight Gain data increases significantly for 650C tests compared to the 550C testing for the first 200 hours

SEM Images Comparing RG to IG CO2 Testing

16

Distribution and morphology of oxides on the surface of 347 after tested in (a)(b)(c)Research , (d)(e)(f)Industrial S-CO2 Industrial SC-CO2 at 650oC for 200hrs

a. b. c.

d. e. f.

Ongoing Work

17

Temp Materials 450 Haynes 230 Hanes 625 347 310 316

550 Haynes 230 Hanes 625 347 310 316 617 718

650 Haynes 230 Hanes 625 800H 282 740 347 310 SiC 617 718

750 Haynes 230 Hanes 625 800H 282 740 347 310 SiC Ni-22Cr 617 718

• Future testing also includes: – Elevated temperatures up to 850C – Effects of impurities on corrosion (H2O, O2, hydrocarbons) – Varying pressures – Elevated flow rates (erosion)

• Current testing is being completed for the following materials at each given temperatures:

Conclusions

• Research grade CO2 showed a statistically higher difference in the corrosion of Inconel 800H and AFA-OC6 compared to industrial grade CO2 at 550C

• At 650ºC higher weight gain was observed in research grade CO2 for all three alloys – SEM imaging supports this conclusion

• Further testing, and significant analysis will need to be completed to determine oxide growth – TEM, Cross Sections, EDS, XRD

18

Acknowlegements

Acknowledgements This work is supported by NREL Subcontract No. AXL-3-23308-01, under DOE Prime Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 to Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, Management and Operating Contractor for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Cooperative Agreement DE-NE0000677 from the U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Operations.

19

550C 1000 Hour Weight Gain

20

550C 1000 Hour Weight Gain Zoomed

21

H625 RG vs IG Preliminary Data

22 Small standard deviation of samples, statistically significant difference between IG and RG

Modeling Effort Based on Measurements • Duplex oxide is formed in 316 exposed in SCCO2 at 650C

– Outer magnetite (Fe3O4) – Inner Fe-Cr spinel (Fe3-xCrxO4)

• Correlate Spinel stoichiometry with the composition of Fe and Cr

• Estimation of oxide growth from the DFe [1]

C Fe Cr Ni Mn Mo Si Cu Co

0.03 68.2 17.1 10.1 1.56 2.01 0.29 0.45 0.31

[1] L. Martinelli et al., Corrosion Science, 50 (2008) 2537-2548.

Effect of Surface Treatment (HCM12A, 550oC, 20 MPa)

24

HCM12A

Al Coated (200 hrs)

Y Coated (200 hrs)

Shot Peen (0 hrs)

Shot Peen (200 hrs)

Uncoated (200 hrs)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Wei

ght G

ain,

(mg/

cm2 )

Time, (hrs)RG CO2 / Uncoated / HCM12ARG CO2 / Shot Peened (SS Shot) / HCM12ARG CO2 / 5000Å Al Coating / HCM12ARG CO2 / 5000Å Y Coating / HCM12ARG CO2 / Uncoated / 347SS

Temp: 550oCPressure: 20 MPa

Al Coat

Y Coat

Reaction Kinetics & Surface Morphology (347SS)

25

200 hrs

400 hrs

600 hrs

800 hrs

550oC

650oC

HCM12A: 800 hours

1000 hrs

550oC

650oC

450oC

Reaction Kinetics & Surface Morphology (IN800H)

26

200 hrs

400 hrs

600 hrs

800 hrs

550oC

650oC

NF616: 800 hours

HCM12A: 800 hours

1000 hrs

550oC

650oC

450oC

Slight changes in alloy composition can effect corrosion rates

347ss

316ss Thickness 20 μm Fe3O4 and Fe-Cr –O Spinel bilayer scale

Si enrichment in the inner layer and presence of Nb Oxide

Thickness 10 μm Cr2O3/Fe3O4 bilayer scale

316

347

Fe Bal. Bal. Cr 17.4 17.6

7 Ni 13.3 9.62 Al - - Mn 1.7 1.66 Nb - 0.72 Cu - 0.38 Mo 2.7 0.38 Si 0.43 0.77 C 0.04

5 0.051

W - - Ti - - V - - P - 0.02

7 N 0.04

4 -

Cross-section Plan-view

Looser Oxide Scale primarily Fe3O4

Larger size less amount of Cr-Mn rich oxide

Fe oxide on surface

Denser Oxide Scale slower growth – less spall

Smaller size higher amount of Cr-Mn rich Oxide

Nb oxide present on surface

316 ss exposed to research grade s-CO2 at 650C for 1000 hour

347 ss exposed to research grade s-CO2 at 650C for 1000 hou

Summary of current alloy testing

28

Alloys Oxide Number Density overall corrosion rate Comments

IN740 Elongated Nb-Ti rich oxide cluster (50um) Low ~1um-2um/year Excellent corrosion resistnace/ good strength at temp Cr rich oxide (

Summary and Discussion of 316 vs. 347

Oxidation in both 347 and 316 increase with decrease gas impurity level. Fe2O3 tends to form in high impurity gas while Fe3O4 tends to form in low impurity gas. After corrosion test, 316 shows higher weight gain than 347 despite of their similar composition. Continuous Cr2O3 was found in 347 steel in all 3 impurity grade gas, while hardly seen in 316 steel. Higher Cr content in 347 is responsible for its better corrosion resistance, while addition of Nb and Si may also make contributions. Besides, different grain boundary distribution in 347 and 316 could also affect the corrosion behaviors.

29

Materials Corrosion in High Temperature Supercritical Carbon Dioxide�Jacob Mahaffey�Arjun Kalra�Dr. Mark Anderson�Dr. Kumar Sridharan OutlineBackgroundTesting FacilitySample Holder with SamplesTesting ProcedureResearch and Industrial Grade CO2 Gas CertificatesTested Material CompositionsASME Pressure Vessel Code Allowable Stress for Some Tested AlloysBare Sample vs Tested Samples After 200 HoursInconel 800H347 Stainless SteelAlumina-Forming Austenitic (AFA-OC6) Slide Number 14Weight Gain Data for 200 hours at 650CSEM Images Comparing RG to IG CO2 TestingOngoing WorkConclusionsAcknowlegements550C 1000 Hour Weight Gain550C 1000 Hour Weight Gain ZoomedH625 RG vs IG Preliminary DataModeling Effort Based on MeasurementsEffect of Surface Treatment�(HCM12A, 550oC, 20 MPa)Reaction Kinetics & Surface Morphology�(347SS)Reaction Kinetics & Surface Morphology�(IN800H)Slight changes in alloy composition can effect corrosion ratesSummary of current alloy testingSummary and Discussion of 316 vs. 347